baidu_dish

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as accuracy, response format, or limitations (e.g., what happens if the image is not a dish). The description is too brief to provide meaningful transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short but includes pricing information that could be omitted for clarity. It is not tightly structured; the pricing details may distract from the core purpose. Every sentence should earn its place, and the pricing is less relevant for tool selection.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description lacks completeness by not stating what the tool returns. An agent would need to know the output format or additional behavior. The description is insufficient for full understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% (one parameter fully described). The parameter 'image' has a clear description '菜品图片URL', adding meaning beyond the type. The tool description itself does not add extra parameter context, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states '菜品识别' (dish recognition) as the tool's function, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specializing in dish recognition, but the description could be more explicit about the action.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Only mentions pricing and free call limits, which are not usage guidelines. No exclusion criteria or alternative tools are referenced.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.